As a Mets fan, the notion of both Wheeler and Syndergaard pitching for the Phillies would have really bothered me a couple of years ago. Hard to be too upset about it now, though, given their respective places in the standings.

EDIT: Not to hijack the thread, but I think Wheeler leads MLB pitchers (and maybe all players) in bWAR since he signed with the Phillies in 2020. It looks like he's 0.1 ahead of Ohtani over that time period, even including Ohtani's hitting. But I don't subscribe to Stathead so I'm just eyeballing it.

Exactly my thought, Dave. I’m grateful that the Phillies aren’t really in the division race or else this could be sort of uncomfortable.

I guess I’ll just have to wait for the inevitable playoff matchup to self-immolate!

Who's the first prospect? :-)

Looks to me like both the Raisel Iglesias and Syndergaard trades are straight salary dumps by the hapless Angels. At least they got O'Hoppe, who will probably be their mid-2020's starting catcher for Brandon Marsh.

I was surprised they paid more for Marsh than Syndergaard. But, I guess Marsh could still end up a good hitter. He wasn't doing it with LAA though it seems. Moniak could be a 4th OF type still.....or he's junk, hard to say. He did finally tap into his power with his swing in 2022. But, its made him even more vulnerable to ML-quality sliders.

I was surprised they paid more for Marsh than Syndergaard.

Yeah, that's really disappointing from the Angels side of the trade. Syndergaard could really help a contender this year, right now, and all they could get for him was a guy who was a prospect five years ago? Ugh. Weak.

As a Mets fan, the notion of both Wheeler and Syndergaard pitching for the Phillies would have really bothered me a couple of years ago. Hard to be too upset about it now, though, given their respective places in the standings.

Matt Harvey is available. Would it move the needle if they signed him?

Yeah, that's really disappointing from the Angels side of the trade. Syndergaard could really help a contender this year, right now, and all they could get for him was a guy who was a prospect five years ago? Ugh. Weak.

If you combine the trades, the total value exchanged makes more sense. In my opinion, clearly the Angels win the O'Hoppe for Marsh part and lose the Syndergaard for Moniak & Jadiel Sanchez. I mean.....Moniak is probably the better of he and Sanchez. Again though, the total value is comparable and perhaps nobody else was really offering anything for Syndergaard. I'm somewhat surprised that O'Hoppe couldn't net a better return than Marsh. Its not that Marsh is terrible. But, he has had quite a bit of ML play time now and he seems to have settled in as a plus bat with limited power and quality, not top defense in CF. Thats an upgrade on Odubel Herrera. But, I'm not even sure its a huge upgrade on Vierling, perhaps they'll platoon in CF and Herrera will be DFAed. Syndergaard is certainly a huge upgrade on tossing Cristopher Sanchez or Nick Nelson+bullpen out there every 5 days though.

Concur, Dave.

It feels faintly reminiscent of Mets fans seeing Jerry Koosman in a Phils jersey at the start of the '84 campaign.

@Dave & Banta -

I am very disappointed in the lack of Mets movement this deadline. I suppose I shouldn't have become so invested, but as we've done nothing but LOSE ground against people behind us in the last 45 days I imagined something better than a DH platoon and a righty reliever. And last night's offensive anemia on behalf of deGrom (like he never left!) irritated me for the lack of an incoming Contreras.

I am very disappointed in the lack of Mets movement this deadline.

The club activated deGrom, which is roughly the equivalent of the Astros trading for Verlander in 2017.

ORLY? Gee, hadn't heard that 25 times already. Even Cohen used it last night, but at least he admitted it's a hope and a prayer with the injury history.

I understand they just got deGrom back, but it doesn't lessen my disappointment in the Mets FO, what with the moves the Braves AND Philly made.

FFS, you engage in these sorts of histrionics every other spring training/trade deadline.

What's next on your memo of crankiness, bemoaning that deGrom's K/9 ratio right now is the lowest it's been in five seasons?

Plenty of places are echoing my above disappointment.

Lassus is a Debbie Downer, but I've got to agree with him here. I'd probably feel differently if they'd added even one left handed reliever. The fact that they didn't even do that much really pushed me into "what were they thinking" territory. I guess I can squint and see not wanting to give up Vientos for a Contreras rental. But I can't see them not improving the bullpen more than they did. Case in point:

SHOWALTER BROUGHT PAT NAGOCEK INTO A TIE GAME LAST NIGHT, and he promptly and predictably blew it. That's not a team that requires another couple of arms?

And I HATE the Wheeler/Thor situation.

I'd probably feel differently if they'd added even one left handed reliever.

SHOWALTER BROUGHT PAT NAGOCEK INTO A TIE GAME LAST NIGHT, and he promptly and predictably blew it.

I understand the concern about southpaw relief help but this reaction seems too over-the-top.

Regarding Nogosek, come on, last night's sixth inning was clearly his worst outing of the season. And if the response is yesterday was only Nogosek's ninth appearance, then maybe let's direct most of the ire at Buck's bullpen tactics for going to him in a tie game?

Moniak is a former #1 pick. One is tempted to say the Phillies really blew that one, but really, the entire first round in 2016 looks like horsepucky. 23 of the 40 either have 0 or fewer WAR, or haven't appeared in the majors yet, and none have more than 10.

Moniak is a former #1 pick. One is tempted to say the Phillies really blew that one, but really, the entire first round in 2016 looks like horsepucky. 23 of the 40 either have 0 or fewer WAR, or haven't appeared in the majors yet, and none have more than 10.

It's early to be judging on the quality of that round by that number. I mean that list includes Dylan Carlson, Dakota Hudson, Will Smith(The starting catcher for the Dodgers one), Gavin Lux, and a few that are still fairly high on prospects lists.

16 - both things can be true.

It's early to be judging on the quality of that round by that number. I mean that list includes Dylan Carlson, Dakota Hudson, Will Smith(The starting catcher for the Dodgers one), Gavin Lux, and a few that are still fairly high on prospects lists.

Yes, but. Smith has been pretty good. He's also 27 with only 310 games played. Likewise, Hudson is 27 with 60 career GS. They are good players, but they are in their prime and just getting started. Lux and Carlson have time to put up impressive numbers that is true. Still, looking at 2015, you have Swanson, Bregman, Buehler, Kyle tucker, Austin Riley. 2014 has Aaron Nola, Trea turner, Matt Chapman. Yes, 1 and 2 more years of development, but still.

Yes, but. Smith has been pretty good. He's also 27 with only 310 games played. Likewise, Hudson is 27 with 60 career GS. They are good players, but they are in their prime and just getting started. Lux and Carlson have time to put up impressive numbers that is true. Still, looking at 2015, you have Swanson, Bregman, Buehler, Kyle tucker, Austin Riley. 2014 has Aaron Nola, Trea turner, Matt Chapman. Yes, 1 and 2 more years of development, but still.

2016 41 matching player(s). 32 played in the majors (78%). Total of 40.2 WAR, or 1.3 per major leaguer.
2017 42 matching player(s). 32 played in the majors (76%). Total of 138.4 WAR, or 4.3 per major leaguer.
2015 41 matching player(s). 28 played in the majors (68%). Total of 159.8 WAR, or 5.7 per major leaguer.

So for 2016 to catch 2017 they would have to generate 90 or war among all their players next season. Not likely, but not impossible, but I do think the original post on this was right, it's not as strong as the previous two seasons, but that is probably because it doesn't have a standout like those did (Bregman) 2015, Turner/Nola/Chapman 2014. But the fact that it's matched them in players already in the majors and still has a few others who haven't made the majors and are top prospects, makes it feel like it might be a bit deeper.

Before we get too confused, 2017 was a typo for 2014. The 2017 first round has just 15 WAR so far ... that can't be good. (27 of 36 have made the majors already.)

The above four or five posts are why I have a very hard time ever caring at all about trading prospects for established talent.

We should've been willing to part with Vientos if that would have gotten us Contreras, but who knows. Vientos doesn't scream superstar. He screams 1b/DH with power who strikes out too much, even for 2022.

We should've been willing to part with Vientos if that would have gotten us Contreras, but who knows.

Although Contreras was the jewel I wanted over anyone else, it's getting hard to blame the Mets for this, because it isn't like he was grabbed by somebody else. The Cubs were simply being incredibly petulant or stupid it seems.

Before we get too confused, 2017 was a typo for 2014. The 2017 first round has just 15 WAR so far ... that can't be good. (27 of 36 have made the majors already.)

oops, My bad. 2017 would have been

2017 36 matching player(s). 27 played in the majors (75%). Total of 14.8 WAR, or 0.5 per major leaguer.
2016 41 matching player(s). 32 played in the majors (78%). Total of 40.2 WAR, or 1.3 per major leaguer.
2015 42 matching player(s). 32 played in the majors (76%). Total of 138.4 WAR, or 4.3 per major leaguer.
2014 41 matching player(s). 28 played in the majors (68%). Total of 159.8 WAR, or 5.7 per major leaguer.

2018 is also looking better than 2017, right now it looks like 2017 is the weaker of the drafts, and no name jumps out to me from that list, but that is just because I don't know the players anymore. Drew Rasmussen looks to be the most stable on that list right now, having established himself as a solid starting pitcher, for an organization that doesn't use starting pitchers in the traditional sense.

2018 43 matching player(s). 20 played in the majors (46%). Total of 27.0 WAR, or 1.3 per major leaguer.

Although Contreras was the jewel I wanted over anyone else, it's getting hard to blame the Mets for this, because it isn't like he was grabbed by somebody else. The Cubs were simply being incredibly petulant or stupid it seems.

Indeed, it's reasonable to suspect the Cubs demanded more than Vientos from the Amazins.

I’m sure they did at first. But as the clock ticked down, wouldn’t they have accepted Vientos (and a throw in or two) over the supplemental draft pick? Reporting was that the Mets weren’t trading Vientos for a rental. That’s fine for Alvarez, Baty, and maybe Alex Ramirez (who is impressive). Nobody else in the system should be in that category in a season where the Mets have a serious chance at going deep in the postseason. (Yet it was last year they had no problem trading Crow-Armstrong for a futile rental of Javy Baez)

As much as I hate the Mets not getting Contreras (or rather, failing to upgrade catcher at all), it’s not hard to understand their position. They may have very well thought the Cubs would cave and they didn’t. The Cubs not taking the best available offer is much more worthy of criticism, although since we likely will never know what that offer was, it’s a bit hard to accurately judge their performance either.

I’m actually not super worried about the Mets bullpen, provided all their starters stay healthy. They have a lot of options. Relative to their usual dreck, the Mets bullpen is stacked! Again, I still sort of can’t wrap my head around just how bad their catcher position is and how that’s been obvious for the entire season (and before really). If I was them, it’s practically the only thing I would have worried about instead of these marginal DH platoon upgrades. Oh well, what’s done (or isn’t done) is done now. Time to roast these Bravos!

On another note, I don’t feel the least bit bad about highjacking this thread. Phillies deserve it for taking our boys!

Also, HI LASSUS!

On another note, I don’t feel the least bit bad about highjacking this thread. Phillies deserve it for taking our boys!

if you want jeurys familia back that badly, then fine. you can have him.

No thanks, I’m a little too familia with that particular pitcher already.

Besides, they already got rid of him once and inexplicably got him back. You can only do that once, it’s the Bobby Bonilla rule. And we all know how that turns out. Don’t feel like paying Familia until Elon Musk’s 37 children have created an inbred society on Mars (which turns out to just be Greenland).

Besides, they already got rid of him once and inexplicably got him back.

Familia was quite good before they re-signed him. It was only then that he Bonilla'd.

Familia was pretty great from 2014-16, crashed in 17 to a 96 ERA+, before rebounding to a 130 for the Mets in 18 before he was traded (and then performed at 122 for Oakland). Maybe “inexplicable” is wrong to describe resigning him, but to me at the time, it sort of felt like we had come to the end of the road with him being a dominant-ish reliever and were lucky he had rebounded enough to be traded away. I didn’t really expect him to be as bad as he was when he came back though.

Bonilla though, who was actually pretty good his first time as a Met, first season and contact aside (Lindorish really), never should have come back. He was already a sub replacement player the year before the Mets brought him back so it shouldn’t have been hard to predict he’d fail. Combined with the perception of his first tour, his second contract may be the most inexplicable signing they’ve ever had… so it’s fitting it has been memorialized for the rest of time (which yes, is scheduled to end in the next ten years).

Back atcha, Banta.

Figured sniper work had slowed down. Great to see you around.

Familia as rebound middle reliever was a welcome redux. He had his rough moments, but it's hard for a reliever to cross over into the spontaneous self-combustion of Armando Benitez. At least for me, Familia never caused that much danger of my television being hit with a hammer.